Re: Gopher over TLS
It was thus said that the Great Mateusz Viste once stated:
>
> I am not at all interested in gopher over TLS, I consider it as a
> blasphemy. One of the things I like about gopher is its simplicity,
> openness and transparency. But that's me. I can understand that other
> people may have other things that make them "tick". That being said, if
> *I* was interested in gopher-over-TLS, I'd consider two possible scenarios:
>
> 1. using a DNS SRV record to tell "this host supports gopher-over-TLS on
> port xxx"
>
> 2. advertising TLS through CAPS. First, a gopher client fetches the CAPS
> (over plain text), and then it may switch to TLS queries if it sees TLS
> being okay'ed in CAPS.
>
> Both of these solutions need no protocol change (incl. no change in
> gophermaps).
>
> In your blog post you do not address any of these two approaches. But
> again - I don't care really, other than wishing not to be annoyed by
> TLS-people abusing the standard.
The reason I didn't mention then is that I didn't even think of those
solutions. Just trying to find a definitive specification for the CAPS file
has been challenging (and I've not found one yet). Both of these ideas are
much better than what's going on right now.
-spc
Reply to: